Dear Mr. McCarthy

"Dear Mr. McCarthy" is the title given to a private letter originally sent by Vonnegut to Charles McCarthy, chairman of the school board of Drake, North Dakota, on November 16, 1973 regarding the destruction in that town of copies of Slaughterhouse-Five, which had been assigned to a sophomore English class by instructor Bruce Severy.

The letter was first printed in the collection Palm Sunday in March 1981 and later reprinted several times, often including the contextual information from Palm Sunday: first, in December 1981 in Index on Ceonsorship, with a letter to Felix Kuznetzov from the same collection, as "Two Letters", then in the New York Times on February 7, 1982, and again as a stand-alone letter in 2012's Letters. It was featured in the book Letters of Note: An Eclectic Collection of Correspondence Deserving of a Wider Audience, which also included letters from, among others, Hunter S. Thompson, Ray Bradbury, Eddie Slovik, Mark Twain, and Ronald Reagan, as well as Vonnegut's letter to his family upon release from a P.O.W. camp, which is also reproduced in facsimile.

Background

James Dickey, 1970

On Tuesday, November 6, 1973, the school board of Drake, North Dakota deemed that several works assigned by Severy—specifically Slaughterhouse-Five for sophomores, Deliverance by James Dickey for juniors, and Short Story Masterpieces, which included works by Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, James Joyce, and others, for freshman—were obscene and thus not appropriate assigned reading. Board President Charles McCarthy noted "lots of other books" exist that could be assigned, and that the works "might pass in a college but not in this school". The board ordered Superintendent Dale Fuhrman to collect and burn the offending books. According to the school's principal, Bruce Henderson, none of the board members had read any of the books, although some had read excerpts and "since the board meeting Tuesday some may have read entire texts". Although the controversy began with objections from a sophomore, several other students refused to turn over their copies and as a result had their lockers searched. Others stole some of the confiscated copies or claimed to have lost theirs and offered to pay for them, but Fuhrman intended to contact that parents in an effort to retrieve all the copies.

Students commented that they were already familiar with the "offensive" terms used, with one, Mark Olson, arguing that the language wasn't profane but expressive. Olson's mother found nothing objectionable in the work and was much more bothered by the book burning itself. Two students, Del-Ray Lemer and Pam Schnase, sent Fuhrman a letter signed by nearly all 35 class members urging the reinstatement of Vonnegut's novel, calling it "respectable and interesting, and better than what we've been reading". Several board members refused to comment on whether they had read the book or how the burning order came about, but President McCarthy commented that "One bad paragraph is enough to make the whole thing look bad". Two clergymen spoke out against the book at the board meeting, Rev. Thomas Benoy calling it "garbage" and Fr. J.S. Axtmann objecting to its "barnyard scenes" but hesitant about the decision to burn the copies, stating "It sounds too much like years past to me". Severy himself was shocked that "any school in the United States would burn books" and argued that the novel "tries to knock down some of our hypocritical practices". He stated that the work, which the class was one-third of the way through, was well-received and that "C and D students were suddenly writing A papers". Although Severy claimed that the board had advised him to resign or he would be fired, Fuhrman denied this. Stating his was not intending to court controversy, Severy mentioned assigning works such as Giants of the Earth and The Hobbit instead for future classes.

Severy responded to the controversy in the November 10 edition of the Minot Daily News. Saying he chose Slaughterhouse-Five for its immediacy, modern style, brevity, and its ability to address "current problems in an honest and straightforward manner", he argued the book at its core is not about obscenity but questions why humans continue to kill each other. Beyond this, it asks about the lack of dignity and respect for others found in the world, why material success fails to bring satisfaction, and how apathy results from a seeming lack of free will. As a "moral book", our own inhuman behavior is exposed and solutions are sought. The language Vonnegut uses is that of the real world. Those on the school board have banned it without even reading the entire work, which is "academically dishonest, anti-intellectual, and irrational". Severy insisted that only one student in his two classes objected to the book after two chapters, and he would not require a student to read a book they or their parents objected to. Nonetheless, he stated that he will abide by the decision of the school board.

Farmers Store, Drake, ND

By the weekend, the story was picked up by several news organizations across the United States, such as the New York Times, which noted that nearly three dozen copied of the book were burned. On Monday the 12th, the school board continued to defend its decision in the face of much external criticism as reporters and television crews began arriving in the town. Fuhrman, who had taken to acting as the primary spokesperson for the board, again denied that Severy had been advised to resign or be fired. He further stated the Slaughterhouse-Five had no literary value and that "The normal way we get rid of trash is by burning it". He said that, despite the national attention, the board would have come to same conclusion again since, in the words of board member Melvin Alma, "according to local standards this material is not suitable for our children as required reading". Board members took pains to note that the books are not banned as outside reading, but cannot be assigned for the class. Vonnegut himself telephoned Severy the day before, informing him that the book had been banned on three other occasions—twice in the South, once in Michigan—and that "As soon as they got to any judge who had been to law school, he threw it out".

Poet Tom McGrath and supporters at Minnesota State College, Moorhead had started a Bruce Severy Defense Fund. Mrs. Severy reported that she had been contacted by the Minot committee of the American Civil Liberties Union about a possible class action suit, while the school board hired Walfrid Hankla as counsel. Everett Ballmann, associate professor of political science at Minot State College and vice chairman of the local ACLU said Severy required "a legal guarantee of free speech" to perform as a teacher. He called the board's action "arbitrary, capricious and subjective" and noted that "[t]here were no prior standards for choosing literature" and that purchase of the books by the board constituted acceptance. Fuhrman admitted that he had not read any of the books before the board approved them, but that future readings assigned by Severy would need board approval. Local ACLU chairman Carl Kalvelage, also at MSC, said the burning of books, which "has always been closely associated with the Nazi regime of the 1930's" has now brought Drake to disreputable national prominence. Fuhrman, however, argued that "trash is normally used to fire the coal furnace", adding the the short story collection was probably also assigned to be burned since "[t]he board wanted to make a clean sweep. The stories probably didn't have anything wrong". Principal Bruce Henderson noted that collection featured "the work of some of the best authors" and Severy said "It doesn't even have a 'damn' in it". President McCarthy could not recall who specifically suggested burning the books, and the minutes of the meeting had not been made available. Fuhrman claimed the question of firing Severy was discussed but dropped.

Severy commented that all the national attention "serves the school board right" for thinking that "Drake was not connected to the rest of the world" and says he still would have assigned the texts. Support for the burning appeared to be widespread in Drake among parents, but opposed by the students. Rev. Benoy said he wouldn't want his son to read it in high school, while Rev. Axtmann said allowing students to read books their parents objected to would "tend to promote fighting". Kim Duchsherer, the student who originally objected to the novel said she "didn't like the words used" and "felt the story could have been told without them". Her mother then brought to issue to the attention of board member Leslie Gerber, leading to a special three and half hour meeting. The elder Duchsherer had no specific passages she found problematic, but pointed out to the reporter that newspapers can't print "four-letter words" so it should not be "okay in terms of this literature". Severy said had he been approached directly, he would have assigned a different book to anyone who objected, although he claims that only the children of Duchsherer and Gerber raised any problems. One junior student thought nothing in the novel should offend anyone since "Schools are supposed to prepare you for life" and the board is "getting worked up about nothing". Severy claimed the controversy was ultimately about student access to books.

During a school board meeting the following Tuesday, minor vandalism struck the First National Bank of Drake, the public school, and cars of some school officials. According to Severy, "eggs, tomatoes and other assorted garbage" were thrown in and on the bank as well as cars owned by Fuhrman and School Board Clerk Clayton Kemper, while some walls of the school were smeared with soap, wax, slogans, and "pornographic drawings". Furhman and Kemper, however, insisted the incidents were "nothing unusual", with the latter denying a report by Mayor O.W. Fors that Kemper had sat on a dozen eggs in the seat of his car on Tuesday night. All the participants pointed out that such vandalism was not uncommon, although Severy and Fors speculated that these events might have been directly tied to the book controversy, which Fuhrman and Kemper denied. Severy, who said he had been blamed for the vandalism and "bad publicity" for the town, decried the "deplorable" acts. The board would not comment on what was discussed Tuesday night and again refused to release the minutes from the previous week's meeting which began the controversy.

Ultimately, the custodian burned the books in the furnace beneath the school gym, as is done with all "wastepaper." Reporters from throughout the United States filled Drake, and many parents and supporters of the move were largely baffled by the notoriety. Many of the townspeople continued to support the decision, but now would have simply stored the books rather than burning them, as is done in other communities. Fuhrman said no one considered the symbolic significance of book burning and argued that the decision did not prohibit students from reading the books, but only prevented them from being assigning as a class requirement. Among the coverage was a two and and a half minutes segment on the NBC Evening News on November 15, 1973. Saks News Agency, the largest supplier of paperbacks in North Dakota at the time, ordered 400-500 copies each of Slaughterhouse-Five and Deliverance in expectation of increased local demand. Both were bestsellers in 1969 and 1970, respectively, but few were in stock when the controversy broke.

The Minot Daily News printed a brief interview with Vonnegut on the 13th, who said that "Everybody's against book burning". Sally Severy found Vonnegut "very cynical" as she expected when he telephoned the Sunday after receiving a letter from Severy and being contacted by the Associated Press. He insisted that "There's nothing obscene about the book... there's nothing to turn on with". Although banned before, this was the first time he'd heard of the book literally being burned, which he called illegal, and stated that he thought "there are no legal grounds for censoring anything high school students read". He was confused by Axtmann's references to "barnyard scenes" which he says are not in the book. He acknowledged that "obviously" he could have edited it more and has no idea what Billy Pilgrim would think of the burning of books.

Vonnegut's Letter

Addressing Charles McCarthy as chairman of the Drake School Board, Vonnegut identifies himself as one of the American writers whose books were consigned to their furnace. Many in the Drake community have suggested that his work is evil, which Vonnegut finds insulting and indicates that somehow writers are not real to them. He and his publisher have done nothing to exploit this recent notoriety and are only "angered and sickened and saddened". No copies of this private letter to the people of Drake has been sent to anyone else, although Vonnegut wonders if McCarthy will in fact show it to them. From comments McCarthy has made, it would seem that he views writers as "ratlike people who enjoy making money from poisoning the minds of young people". Vonnegut says he is "a large, strong person" of fifty-one who did farm work in his youth, is good with tools, and has raised six children, three adopted, two of whom are farmers. He is a veteran of the Second World War, awarded a Purple Heart, who has earned what he has through hard work and has never run afoul of the law. He has interacted with young people while on the faculty of the University of Iowa, Harvard, and the City College of New York and at the many commencement addresses he has delivered.

Had the board bothered to read his books, they would find that "they are not sexy, and do not argue in favor of wildness of any kind". Instead they encourage people be more kind and responsible. In them, characters speak coarsely because people, especially soldiers and workers, do so and children are aware of this. It is not words but "evil deeds and lying" that cause harm. No doubt a community has a right to decide what books their children will be made to read, but if it does so "in an ignorant, harsh, un-American manner", others, including their own children, are entitled to call them "bad citizens and fools". Drake seems mystified by all the attention, but it has simply learned that it is part of American civilization, which has fought wars against book burning nations. Americans must allow all ideas to circulate in a community. A board devoted to education with "wisdom and maturity" would publicly acknowledge that they have taught their youth a bad lesson by burning books they hadn't even read. It should assure that its children are exposed to many ideas so they are better prepared to be adult human beings, instead of insulting good citizens who are very real.

Official Responses

Dellis Schrock, president of the North Dakota Council of English Teachers, condemned the act, saying "freedom to read is essential to our democracy" and that "any book to which no one objects is probably valueless". He further called the search of students' lockers "an invasion of privacy". North Dakota Education Association President Eldon Krein also noted that it was "almost inconceivable that in 1973 we could have a book burning" and criticized the board's failure to allow a defense of the work. Although Severy was not member of the NDEA, the organization was interested in the rights of teachers in general "to teach in relative freedom".

Vernon Eberly, deputy director of the State Department of Public Instruction in North Dakota, said the decision by the Drake School Board should not reflect on the state school system as a whole, but also suggested that the event "may have been blown out of proportion". Since local school boards are independent entities, they "can do as they wish" in terms of deciding "what books they put in their libraries and classrooms". Although the department "certainly doesn't condone book burning", the school has the right to destroy books or other material as they see fit. He suggested future problems could be avoided by school officials reviewing books before allowing them to be used. James Dertien, chair of the North Dakota Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee, condemned the act as "an attack on the civil rights of the students", especially "those primary liberties in a student's life having to do with the process of inquiry and learning". He argued that literature must deal with reality honestly and without hypocrisy, and that if the world is portrayed realistically, then objectionable language is unavoidable.

John Conrad, Chairman of the North Dakota American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, condemned the burning, telling members that the act "is a symbolic gesture more than the actual destruction of offensive material or ideas", noting that it has probably only increased interest in the books, especially among teenagers. Calling it an act of tyrannical governments, Conrad argued that "a good literature teacher can provide the guidance between reading a book for its obscenities or finding in it something of universal value". However, Q.R. Schulte, a member of the commission, denied that Conrad was making a statement on behalf of the whole organization at the November 16 meeting, saying "[o]ne man got up and made his personal statement but there was no discussion".

The Authors League of America called it a "mindless, primitive act of censorship". Dr. Helen D. Wise, president of the National Education Association, criticized the Drake School Board for the book burning, as well as an incident in McBee, South Carolina in which a teacher who also assigned Slaughterhouse-Five was arrested after a citizen accused him of distributing obscene material to minors. Only after the book was removed from the school library were charges dropped. Wise called these incidents—as well as a three year program in Ridgefield, Connecticut to censor various writings from Thomas Jefferson to Eldrige Cleaver—"an unreasoned attack on academic freedom" that prevents teachers from performing their duty to encourage free inquiry. Such drives to "protect" children in fact prevent them from gaining the tools necessary to come to their own conclusions.

Local Reaction

November 17 saw the first collection of Letters to the Editor in the Minot Daily News on the Drake affair. Ron Rogelstad, a student at MSC, was "appalled" that book burnings could still occur, particularly of works that the burners had not even read, and suggested that the Drake School Board get an education. George D. Brown of Parshall proposed nominating all the school board members to the Supreme Court since they know "the difference between the decent and the obscene". To those who critique burning books which haven't been read in their entirety, he points out that only one bite is necessary to tell if an apple is rotten. Donald M. Johnson of Minot criticized two recent events that had brought North Dakota into public disrepute. First were comments by Father John Owens opposing a visit by then-New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller, as well as the "almost unfathomable actions" in Drake, a result of powerful people "who are faced backward". He called rejecting literature which had been praised "by eminent scholars and critics as excellent works" because of some common profanity is "as backward as any act imaginable".

James Breckenridge, the Academic Dean of Northwest Bible College in Minot objected to the "humanistic outcry", arguing that a local school board has the right to teach within "a Judaeo-Christian heritage", which is "as much a freedom as the freedom to read". Obscenity distorts humanity's existence into base materialism instead partaking of the divine. Freedom without authority is tyranny and if freedom is truly subjective, then there is nothing inherently wrong about burning books. Morris Erickson, a math teacher at Tioga High School, noted that bestsellers are not necessarily the "best" books, since writers simply produce what readers want. However, profanity, which is forbidden in news articles and television, clearly violates social ideas of good taste. Some instructors assign such works simply because the students are more likely to read them, but when we stop bothering to combat such works, "the enemies of our nation and those who are striving to break down Christian principles" will win. Theo Knutson of Norma opined that the only problem with the book burning was that there should have been at least a week's notice "so that grieved and burdened parents" could have joined together "as the flames consumed the trash". He argues that there's no need to know the contents of such books nor the motives of "the bewhiskered characters who promote them" since everyone is aware of the "left-leaning, freedom-from-God activities of the N.E.A."

Further public comments were printed the following week on the 24th. Mrs. Amelia Albright of Lansford praised the school board, which she felt "couldn't all be wrong about the literature" that was burned which "certainly were unfit for the students". Such material, she argued, would make the youth "victims of despair" instead of learning "moral excellence and genuine hope" as well as "an absolute standard of right and wrong" which can only be done with "clean literature and right thinking, and right teaching". Likewise, Johanna Miller of Westhope saluted the board for fighting the vulgarity of the book along with "other evils that destroy society—alcohol, drugs, immorality, rotten movies and gutter literature", all of which are surely "the devil's tools". Instead of defending "so-called liberty", government corruption must be fought by courageous institutions like the Drake School Board. However, Mark Maupin of Minot disagreed, positing that the point of education is exposure to new ideas and chiding the Drake School Board for thinking itself so righteous as to assume their children are incapable of independent thought. Such "Fascist behavior" against not crude language but uncomfortable ideas—demonstrating an assumption that only those in authority know what is right—is the type of attitude that is causing young people to leave North Dakota. Such people would do well to review the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Mrs. F. Schultz of Dearborn Heights, Michigan wrote in the Detroit News, which was republished in the Minot Daily, News that after living near Detroit, also known as "Murder City USA", for 30 years, Drake sounded like a paradise. Ever since the 1967 riots, which was "nothing but blacks and whites looting and burning the place with no one stopping them" due to "a political thing" between Governor George Romney and President Lyndon Johnson, the city has never been the same. If the Severys would prefer the big city ,where they could surely "find all the 'porno' reading and permissiveness" they desire, instead of a small town that they complain has no movie theater, they should consider relocating. Severy personally responded, writing that he's sorry the Schulz' have chosen to live in such a terrible place, whereas his family are quite happy with their home. Although true that he has lamented a lack of a movie theater in the town, this is because "[f]ilms are a cultural richness" and not because "all theaters show is pornography", as Mrs. Schulz seems to believe. In terms of the book controversy itself, he explains that his "supplemental readings" were approved by the board in the summer, ordered and paid for, and only banned after they were already in use. He suggested the School Board should spend more time doing its job by making sure it has no objections to assigned reading material before it orders it. Oak Park Theater in Minot showed the film version of Slaughterhouse-Five on the weekend of December 1-2, with ads specifically referencing the controversy.

Lawsuit

In early February 1974, the ACLU filed suit against the Drake School Board, drafted at its New York City headquarters, asking that the board not be allowed to "arbitrarily censor reading materials", nor impose sanctions on Severy, fire him, or refuse to hire him because of the controversy. As a replacement book for Slaughterhouse-Five in the coming semester, Severy had proposed Fahrenheit 451, which Fuhrman rejected since "the board might take it personally". Severy also claimed that Fuhrman had suggested "on a one-to-one basis" that he resign due to an "attitudinal change" in his teaching. However, Fuhrman denied this, saying the school board wouldn't consider Severy's next contract until the spring.

By mid-March the board had voted unanimously not to renew Severy's contract. He claimed a group of parents presented a petition during a board meeting on March 12, declaring he was "not a fit person to be teaching the young people". This was denied by McCarthy and Fuhrman, who also claimed about half of Severy's 100 students were no longer attending his class. Severy put the number around 25, who were apparently going to study hall instead, and noted that another English teacher had recently been hired, purportedly "to give students a choice". He saw this as "hurting the whole community" and noted that the situation had become so tense that his garbage wasn't even being picked up anymore. A week later Severy was granted a continuance of his hearing, but the hearing was suspended indefinitely after Severy submitted a statement to the board that laid out his position and refuted various statements made by Fuhrman, specifically charges of "change of attitude and tardiness", as well as "contempt towards the school board and administration in his classes", according to Severy's attorney Nevin Van de Streek. On April 9, before an April 15 deadline under state law, Severy was informed that he would not be rehired for the next year due to "attitudinal change", "neglect of duty", and "parental disapproval". Severy said he would take "appropriate legal action", including seeking damages of "at least $100,000" as well as reinstatement.

Burt Neuborne, 2007

Paul Benson, 1990

By June 27, 1975, the case was set to be heard in U.S. District Court at Bismarck, seeking $50,000, reinstatement, and clarification of issues around academic freedom, specifically if instructors require board approval before assigning class material. Attorneys Burt Neuborne of the American Civil Liberties Union, Alan H. Levine of the New York Civil Liberties Union, and Nevin VanderStreek of Minot represented Severy before Judge Paul Benson. The school board was represented by Minot attorney Walfrid Hankla, who had served in other cases between teachers and school boards, while Fuhrman was individually represented by Thomas E. Rutten of Devils Lake. On the eve of the trial, Severy met again with Vonnegut in North Dakota, along with Neuborne, Levine, and recent New York University law graduate and future respected legal scholar Judith Resnik.

By September 19, 22 months after the start of the incident, a stipulation for a five-point consent judgment was signed by Judge Benson. Severy was awarded $5,000 in damages, while Slaughterhouse-Five and Deliverance were not required to be utilized in future classes. Should they be assigned and there are any student objections, alternate books could be made available, which was similar to Drake's preexisting policy. School officials were also prohibited from "maintaining or distributing oral or written records" denigrating Severy's teaching performance. Severy's other requests were denied, specifically that the school rehire him, not be allowed to sanction him, and that there be no requirements for board approval of class materials.

Aftermath

See Also: Bruce Severy#Life After Drake

Prairie Patchwork: A Collection of Anecdotes from Drake, North Dakota, a 1977 book for the 75th anniversary of the town's founding—assembled by Cleo Cantlon, who wrote an article on Severy for the Minot Daily News in July 1973 before the controversy—contained a brief mention of the affair. Five years after the event, the Minot Daily News ran an article indicating that bad feelings still persisted among many of the 650 residents of Drake about the negative publicity. Richard Brockell, a high school English teacher, responded with hostility to an attempted interview, although the mayor, George Stancel, claimed the whole thing was "pretty much forgotten". Along with Severy, many of the administrators involved had moved away, while those who remained refused to comment. Marvin Goplen, the school's principal and librarian, said Vonnegut's books were absent from the library. VanderStreek, who served on the Minot Library Board of Directors, continued to defend the right of libraries, and to a lesser extent classrooms, to contain material some segments of the local population might find obscene. Approaching the the thirty-fifth anniversary of the controversy, no one now teaching at the school had been involved and many of the main figures had left the area, but it remained a delicate topic among locals who remembered. Dakota Datebook, a program supported by Prairie Public Radio in partnership with the State Historical Society of North Dakota and with funding from the North Dakota Humanities Council, featured at least two pieces on the story, one of which was included in their collection Dakota Datebook: North Dakota Stories from Prairie Public in 2019.

For the fortieth anniversary in 2013, Hannah Johnson of the Bismarck Tribune interviewed local residents, examining how "the small town battled to reclaim its reputation" after the affair, which longtime resident Noel Hanenberg noted "put a dark shadow over this town for a while". Muryl Olson—whose mother and brother defended Severy, a family friend, in the initial articles—said his mother told a friend at the Minot Daily News of the school board's decision, but others in Drake continue to believe that Severy told the media himself to work "the sympathy vote". Many remained bitter toward him, such as Shirley Neuharth, who was school secretary at the time and refused to talk with him after the incident began, saying Severy "never made a real effort" to join the community and invited the national media to Drake under "false pretenses". Bernice Smith, whose son Dale was in Severy's class and who was among the parents who petitioned for the hiring of a new English teacher, said the town was not against the Severy family, but that they "just didn't want to participate". She noted that the media attention made the residents "scared to talk to anyone because everything was taken out of context". Many residents refused interview requests from Johnson or claimed not to remember the event.

Muryl's sister Katie said she and her brother Mark staged a sit-in at the school in response and remained in Severy's class after the new English teacher was hired. However, she noted that she and her siblings were already infamous "in the school for questioning authority". Former student Allen Martin was not bothered by the book, while Mary Gange Field says the national media attention was exciting, but that it was "mostly parents taking sides and students pretty much continued with their lives". Johnson reported that residents at that time were less concerned about the books themselves than holding "bitterness and resentment" toward Severy and the national media, which Dave Senechal, another former Severy student, said gave the town "sort of a raw deal" by portraying them as proud and joyous book burners. Rather, he argues they were simply "decent people from a small town... not interested in politics... [who] though they were doing the right thing". The population of Drake in 2013 was half what it was in 1973, and the school had integrated with nearby Anamoose. Its two current English teachers, Jean Bartz who had taught in Drake for 21 years and Kim Meckle who had taught for five and also served as librarian of the joint school and town library, said they had never assigned any of the three books or had a parent question their class readings. The two novels were also not available at the library, although a student once requested Slaughterhouse-Five through inter-library loan. The coal burning furnace in which the books were burned still heated the school.